The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
On Topic. Boris has a point while not being 100% truthful here.
The Tories were doing worse than being a "handful" of points behind Labour in summer 2022 but they were probably doing no worse than you'd expect for a government in mid-term.
That's not the case since Boris was removed from office when the Tories went over the edge of the cliff after the Liz and Kwasi debacle.
Rish has improved the Con position slightly but not by enough to prevent Labour forming the next government even accounting for swingback in the next year or so....
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
One of them had to stop or the other "forced" into the road and fast traffic, or I suppose they could both have collided.
A mum has wowed royal fans after transforming her son into Prince Harry for World Book Day. 📚
Three-year-old Ellis Wright is known for his bold personality. Keen to follow her son's wishes, as he didn't want a traditional costume for his first World Book Day at preschool, mum Melissa suggested the Duke of Sussex and author of Spare - and the youngster loved it.
📚 Using children's hair spray and face paint, she transformed Ellis into Prince Harry, complete with ginger hair and a beard, which her son picked as his favourite part of the outfit.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
One of them had to stop or the other "forced" into the road and fast traffic, or I suppose they could both have collided.
Had I been the pedestrian, I'd have stepped aside, and the cyclist would probably have been able to squeeze past. Let's not forget that the cyclist was 77 years old and possibly unsure of where she was meant to be. Perhaps she thought it was actually a cycle path. We all make mistakes.
If this wasn’t a real conversation between a PM and his scientific and political advisers about a lethal pandemic, it would be funny. Sadly it is real and thoroughly depressing. Is the teaching of maths at Eton so poor? Johnson: “What is the mortality rate of Covid?” @Telegraph
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
Very true. But the essential difference is drivers have a two-ton lump of metal moving at high speed so the consequences of their errors are so much worse. The more dangerous a vehicle is, the more the driver should have to prove they are competent to be in charge of that vehicle.
Drivers are massively under-regulated to the point of insanity, purely because they are such a powerful voting bloc. I find it grimly amusing that as someone who rides a scooter regularly (the motorcycle kind, not an e-scooter) I have to pass two practical tests to get a license, while car drivers only have to do one. If I want to ride a scooter with a larger engine I have to go back and do those tests again on a more powerful machine.
But drivers can do one test in a Ford Fiesta and then run off and buy a McLaren and possibly kill someone with it.
When I'm out riding I am not afraid of pedestrians, runners or cyclists. But I am very afraid of drivers, enough to treat each one like they are a blind, selfish, incompetent fool. Because far too many of them are. And the Government is not interested in getting them off the road until it's too late.
Want to reduce congestion, pollution and road fatalities? Make drivers sit a refresher test every 5 years and sort cars into categories based on power/size/wight and make people take a test on that type of car before they can drive it. A lot will fail because they're just not safe behind the wheel, which is why none of our political parties have the balls to try anything like this. They'll keep tinkering with 20mph limits and LTNs, ignoring the real problem because it's politically toxic to actually fix it.
You miss my point; pedestrians and runners should be afraid of cyclists. So should drivers.
You are probably an excellent cyclist. But many cyclists are not. And even you would probably admit to having made mistakes whilst out on your bike?
On topic. I agree with you Boris can rightly claim it never looked as mid term unrecoverable at any time under him as it does now.
Considering Boris is actually right about that, how did we get here? Because Con MPs thought they had a get out of jail card in the insanely popular Dishy Rishi, brainwashed themselves into believing they would get a bounce back to perhaps a majority defending support under Rishi Sunak, so once foiled by their own membership it wasn’t too long before Con MPs got what they wanted. They bet the next election on this hunch.
The truth here, those who hate Johnson, his bluster, boosterism, bullshit, really hate him, as far as the hate scale on offer will allow. Classic marmite because it’s also true, if Boris became leader now they would go into the next election with more voters than with Rishi.
What evidence proves me right? Here are snips of what Mike Smithson posted last week to prove it. Under Boris the Tories 38% in the Red Wall (Labour heartland) seats they won for the first time time last time, Only 7 behind Labour Mid Term, EVEN after Sue Gray, and AFTER fines, and around time he is ousted. And in contrast how the Sunak bounce never happened.
Why and how does this work psychologically and psephologically? Different types of politician and personality. Boris, populist similar to Trump, playing on how much better it used to be so let’s rebuild better, makes voters look forward and forget about austerity, forget 13 wasted year of income erosion becuase they are given hope of better times - whilst Rishi just resonates everything that reminds voters the Tories have been in 13 years and under him just more of the same. Sunak’s slicker Technocrat platform and style is just so similar to everything voters remember and hate about these years of Tory governments, delivering income erosion and ongoing austerity.
On Topic. Boris has a point while not being 100% truthful here.
The Tories were doing worse than being a "handful" of points behind Labour in summer 2022 but they were probably doing no worse than you'd expect for a government in mid-term.
That's not the case since Boris was removed from office when the Tories went over the edge of the cliff after the Liz and Kwasi debacle.
Rish has improved the Con position slightly but not by enough to prevent Labour forming the next government even accounting for swingback in the next year or so....
Stuartinromford's earlier posting of the Wiki chart with a trend line suggests that the rot well and truly set in for the Tories long before Johnson departed:
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
A mum has wowed royal fans after transforming her son into Prince Harry for World Book Day. 📚
Three-year-old Ellis Wright is known for his bold personality. Keen to follow her son's wishes, as he didn't want a traditional costume for his first World Book Day at preschool, mum Melissa suggested the Duke of Sussex and author of Spare - and the youngster loved it.
📚 Using children's hair spray and face paint, she transformed Ellis into Prince Harry, complete with ginger hair and a beard, which her son picked as his favourite part of the outfit.
Poor lad. They're clearly preparing to kick him out of the house and give his room to his dodgy uncle
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
One of them had to stop or the other "forced" into the road and fast traffic, or I suppose they could both have collided.
Had I been the pedestrian, I'd have stepped aside, and the cyclist would probably have been able to squeeze past. Let's not forget that the cyclist was 77 years old and possibly unsure of where she was meant to be. Perhaps she thought it was actually a cycle path. We all make mistakes.
If she'd shouted, "You shouldn't be on the pavement," instead of, "Get off the f-ing pavement," would the verdict have been different?
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
My favorite is meaningless soundbite but as SKS is a liar i fear it may end up in the meaningless soundbite bin by next month along with all the previous pledges/promises/missions
Pity
Labour losing general elections isn't meaningless though - it means Tory governments.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
Did you watch the video? It's a bit more than shouting. The cyclist tried to avoid the pedestrian, but the pedestrian appeared to deliberately block her path, forcing her onto the road. Having said that, there wasn't much room to manoeuvre, and the cyclist shouldn't have been going at the speed she was on that path.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I think it must. Though why didn't the cyclist just stop? Going fast enough that she couldn't brake in time?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Which PBer was it who used to entertain us with tales of the fat men on fixies?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
As a verified PB cyclist: if that's the standard, about a quarter of the drivers in Edinburgh would be in prison for the lack of care they afford to people walking and cycling.
Note: you don't need to hit a cyclist to kill them. I was crossing the tram tracks on Princes Street but, because a coach was an inch behind me, I got all flustered. Nearly came off under the pressure and would have gone straight under him given the lack of time to react.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I don't see how the cyclist can have been "forced off the pavement" - they could always have stopped. If they went onto the carriageway without looking to see if there was any traffic overtaking them, whose fault is that?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
One of them had to stop or the other "forced" into the road and fast traffic, or I suppose they could both have collided.
Had I been the pedestrian, I'd have stepped aside, and the cyclist would probably have been able to squeeze past. Let's not forget that the cyclist was 77 years old and possibly unsure of where she was meant to be. Perhaps she thought it was actually a cycle path. We all make mistakes.
I missed it watching the video on the page, with the reporter but 30 seconds in you actually see a cyclist squeezing past the reporter (quite quickly). He is a few inches from the kerb, and they did not cross right by the lamppost. I can see why that might not work with a 77 year old cyclist and a pedestrian with cerebral palsy and partial vision.
Its a tragic accident where both sides could have been safer and more considerate, but not manslaughter imo.
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
Two and possibly three of them are a bit tainted by national exceptionalism, so I guess you would have to pick making the streets safe or breaking down barriers to opportunity.
Yep, that's also my top 2. Although I like them all except for the 'highest growth in the G7' bollox.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
As a verified PB cyclist: if that's the standard, about a quarter of the drivers in Edinburgh would be in prison for the lack of care they afford to people walking and cycling.
Note: you don't need to hit a cyclist to kill them. I was crossing the tram tracks on Princes Street but, because a coach was an inch behind me, I got all flustered. Nearly came off under the pressure and would have gone straight under him given the lack of time to react.
This is the nonsense cyclists have to deal with in Scotland. I might even ask DavidL for his opinion - what are the police/PF up to here?
On topic: I think it would depend on the size of your hand. For Donald Trump -- who is still angry at being called a short-fingered vulgarian decades ago -- a handful would be 2 or 3. For some pro basketball players, a handful might easily be 12, or more.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I think it must. Though why didn't the cyclist just stop? Going fast enough that she couldn't brake in time?
Maybe going too fast combined with slow reactions - she was 77. Or maybe she thought she could squeeze past.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
I thought that the latest edition of the Highway Code basically prioritised the more vulnerable, i.e. cars give way to cyclists and cyclists give way to pedestrians.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I might be in a good position to comment on this, as I think I know exactly where that is, and I have walked, run and cycled past there (many times for the former, several times for running and cycling).
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
I thought that the latest edition of the Highway Code basically prioritised the more vulnerable, i.e. cars give way to cyclists and cyclists give way to pedestrians.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Which PBer was it who used to entertain us with tales of the fat men on fixies?
A local cycling club where I live - all the gear and no idea. Also no training. Not actually fixies, probably.
The kind of people who spend 5 figures on a bike but can't get up a 5% gradient.
EDIT: behaviour much as described above. The bit that gets to me, is that they do this, when about 30 minutes away at slow, easy cycling pace, you have Richmond Park, with long smooth roads which have been set up specifically for people to really go for it on their bikes.
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
Are those Sir Keir's big policies? That's sub-EdStone level.
The policies will be in the manifesto. We've been through this several times now.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
I thought that the latest edition of the Highway Code basically prioritised the more vulnerable, i.e. cars give way to cyclists and cyclists give way to pedestrians.
Yep. It's not really working in practice though - I was cycling along, indicated to turn left across a side road but then stopped in the carriageway to allow some pedestrians to cross the side road (as all of us should according to the HC).
Nearly got wiped out by a driver from behind as a result.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
Was the cyclist going too fast to stop? If so, why?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I might be in a good position to comment on this, as I think I know exactly where that is, and I have walked, run and cycled past there (many times for the former, several times for running and cycling).
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
Tragic incident but I completely agree. Shocking decision. The poor woman, it was an accident.
Is leaving the scene of an accident a crime? - if so then maybe there is a case to answer there but even then there was the car driver present and possibly other witnesses.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I might be in a good position to comment on this, as I think I know exactly where that is, and I have walked, run and cycled past there (many times for the former, several times for running and cycling).
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
I guess the pedestrian's failure give aid or stick around probably didn't help her case.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I might be in a good position to comment on this, as I think I know exactly where that is, and I have walked, run and cycled past there (many times for the former, several times for running and cycling).
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
There is an important aspect in which I have to agree with you. (Yeah, it hurts, JJ, but whatever.) Even if it is a shared path, rights are not necessarily equal. Cyclists should be giving way to pedestrians in cases like this, so when faced with an elderly woman hogging the middle of a narrow pavement the cyclists should have slowed - to a stop if need be.
I use shared pathways a fair bit. In fact I walk my dogs on one regularly. Most cyclists are sensible and reasonable and accept the obligation on them to give way to slower and generally more vulnerable users. Some though...well, you can join the dots.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
I thought that the latest edition of the Highway Code basically prioritised the more vulnerable, i.e. cars give way to cyclists and cyclists give way to pedestrians.
Yep. It's not really working in practice though - I was cycling along, indicated to turn left across a side road but then stopped in the carriageway to allow some pedestrians to cross the side road (as all of us should according to the HC).
Nearly got wiped out by a driver from behind as a result.
And if I had been the pedestrian I'd not have trusted you anyway, so I would have waited till you were clear. Too many arseholes on bikes to risk committing suicide.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
Are those Sir Keir's big policies? That's sub-EdStone level.
The policies will be in the manifesto. We've been through this several times now.
And let's be honest the problem with the Edstone was not the content, it was the comic thick-of-it visuals and the fact some wag coined the term "Edstone". Ed standing next to a big stone with stuff engraved on it. Echoes of Spinal Tap too. If he'd published the same pledges on a one page leaflet or a pledge card nobody would have batted an eyelid.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I think it must. Though why didn't the cyclist just stop? Going fast enough that she couldn't brake in time?
Maybe going too fast combined with slow reactions - she was 77. Or maybe she thought she could squeeze past.
Or maybe she was squeezing past and flinched when another gesture was made?
There is a lot missing in this report. Bit Daily Heil.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Mad? Not that you mean it personally, I'm sure, but it isn't really the way to describe someone with cerebral palsy. Which is another factor to consider.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I might be in a good position to comment on this, as I think I know exactly where that is, and I have walked, run and cycled past there (many times for the former, several times for running and cycling).
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
There is an important aspect in which I have to agree with you. (Yeah, it hurts, JJ, but whatever.) Even if it is a shared path, rights are not necessarily equal. Cyclists should be giving way to pedestrians in cases like this, so when faced with an elderly woman hogging the middle of a narrow pavement the cyclists should have slowed - to a stop if need be.
I use shared pathways a fair bit. In fact I walk my dogs on one regularly. Most cyclists are sensible and reasonable and accept the obligation on them to give way to slower and generally more vulnerable users. Some though...well, you can join the dots.
The cyclist (77) was considerably older than the "elderly" pedestrian (49). I'm in my 50s myself, and I'm not sure I'd like to be described as elderly!
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
Two and possibly three of them are a bit tainted by national exceptionalism, so I guess you would have to pick making the streets safe or breaking down barriers to opportunity.
Yep, that's also my top 2. Although I like them all except for the 'highest growth in the G7' bollox.
The fundamental problem I have with them is "who would argue for the opposite"?
Secure the lowest sustained growth in the G7? OK, possibly a few watermelons and Corbynites.
But the others? Build an NHS unfit for the future? Make Britain's streets dangerous? Put up barriers to opportunity? Have Britain without clean energy?
What about council Veo Scooter schemes like the one on Oxford (below)?
I'm sure I originally recall that these scooters were allowed on the pavements but it turns out that they must ride on the road. Understandably, hardly anyone wears helmets (would largely defeat the object of the scheme).
So should these scooters be on the pavement or the road? What about if there is a cycle lane?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Wasn't. Video: slim - NB slim - journo and cyclist squewezing past, wheels just on pavement.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Mad? Not that you mean it personally, I'm sure, but it isn't really the way to describe someone with cerebral palsy. Which is another factor to consider.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
Bercause she was a Civil Servant. Senior one. Politics is switched off. Once you resign, you are free.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Mad? Not that you mean it personally, I'm sure, but it isn't really the way to describe someone with cerebral palsy. Which is another factor to consider.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Because there is a lamppost in the way, there is not room for them both at the point they cross.
For comparison look at 30 seconds in on the bbc report, where a cyclist goes past the reporter.
Yes, sure, the pedestrian could have stopped and moved aside, but they had right of way as I understood it. The cyclist could also have stopped, and had the duty to do so.
It doesn't strike me as a terrible solecism by Boris - he doesn't understand something and asks the questions he needs to understand it.
Yes, I agree in this case. I've known politicians who were less bothered about getting the details right. Obviously would be better if he got it first time, but he's making a genuine effort to get on top of it.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
The second in days. His implication that Poland becoming richer than the UK would be some sort of upset to the natural order, or offense against natural justice, was a bit tone deaf too.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Mad? Not that you mean it personally, I'm sure, but it isn't really the way to describe someone with cerebral palsy. Which is another factor to consider.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
We have had of course discussions before about the poor cycling provision in your area, which is odd because it's not far from where I live and the cycling provision by contrast is excellent.
However, a few points need to be made:
1) If it was designated as a cycleway, then it wasn't one and the cyclist was at fault.
2) Is that a killing matter? No. I cycle on pavements that are not cycleways from time to time. Am I breaking the law? Yes. Do I consider that, if the footpath is empty and I have a queue of traffic behind me, less important than letting them through? Also yes. But if there is anyone walking on the path - even if it's a shared way - I either revert to the road to avoid them, or stop to let them past. This person did neither.
3) Is there an issue on the ground where the road is dangerous for cyclists so they are using the pavement for that reason? The video suggests 'yes.' However, that doesn't alter the fact that this other person - who let us not forget is partially sighted so was not in a position to safely take avoiding action - was in the right. She said, in fact, something I have frequently said to motorcyclists riding on the pavement. And the judge, in saying otherwise, is in the wrong.
4) Does a cyclist deserve to die for that? Again, obviously not. But she was still in the wrong.
4) Could the report be wrong? Also yes. But if it isn't, there's been a clear miscarriage of justice. Bound over to keep the peace might be an appropriate verdict, a jail sentence is sheer lunacy.
That said, as you say the poor provision for cyclists to move about safely is probably at the root of the problem. But for that there would have been no problem.
I agree that the cyclist was in the wrong. However the action of the pedestrian in forcing the cyclist off the pavement into a busy road was reckless and indeed likely to result in her serious injury or death. Hence the manslaughter verdict, I guess.
One of them had to stop or the other "forced" into the road and fast traffic, or I suppose they could both have collided.
Had I been the pedestrian, I'd have stepped aside, and the cyclist would probably have been able to squeeze past. Let's not forget that the cyclist was 77 years old and possibly unsure of where she was meant to be. Perhaps she thought it was actually a cycle path. We all make mistakes.
I missed it watching the video on the page, with the reporter but 30 seconds in you actually see a cyclist squeezing past the reporter (quite quickly). He is a few inches from the kerb, and they did not cross right by the lamppost. I can see why that might not work with a 77 year old cyclist and a pedestrian with cerebral palsy and partial vision.
Its a tragic accident where both sides could have been safer and more considerate, but not manslaughter imo.
Yep. As pedestrian, I'd have got out of the way and kept quiet (very willingly if I knew it was a shared path, a bit grudgingly if the pavement). As a cyclist, if on the pavement at all, I'd have slowed to let the pedestrian through that tight point first.
There are a few daft shared pavements on my cycle commute. Not as bad as those, but I ignore them and stick to the road as I think I cycle too fast to belong on a shared narrow pavement with pedestrians. If I did take them, I'd go much slower and be prepared to stop.
On Topic. Boris has a point while not being 100% truthful here.
The Tories were doing worse than being a "handful" of points behind Labour in summer 2022 but they were probably doing no worse than you'd expect for a government in mid-term.
That's not the case since Boris was removed from office when the Tories went over the edge of the cliff after the Liz and Kwasi debacle.
Rish has improved the Con position slightly but not by enough to prevent Labour forming the next government even accounting for swingback in the next year or so....
Stuartinromford's earlier posting of the Wiki chart with a trend line suggests that the rot well and truly set in for the Tories long before Johnson departed:
That is not a graph for which one can sensibly plot a straight line trend and conclude anything.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
Keith can be a bit too cleaver by half sometimes...
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
Bercause she was a Civil Servant. Senior one. Politics is switched off. Once you resign, you are free.
Do you seriously believe that? It would be incredibly hard to be impartial if you had serious political leanings, which she must have had then.
Situation reversed. Sitting Labour PM has report written on them by a senior civil servant which was a major contributory factor to them having to resign. Said civil servant 9 months later resigns and becomes chief of staff to the Tory Leader. Labour would be up in arms, and rightly so.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Wasn't. Video: slim - NB slim - journo and cyclist squewezing past, wheels just on pavement.
Looked like plenty of space to me. It may mystify people but cyclists generally try to avoid hitting pedestrians, if only on self interest grounds. Personally, when cycling, I've never hit a pedestrian except when they've stepped out into the road or cycle lane directly in front of me without looking. Which happens almost every time I get on my bike, and even then I generally manage to avoid them. If it was me I would have been cycling on the road not the pavement, but then I'm not an old lady and the road doesn't look that safe, no cycle lane, fast traffic and the motorists are probably not very friendly. So I'm not surprised she opted for the pavement.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I don't see how the cyclist can have been "forced off the pavement" - they could always have stopped. If they went onto the carriageway without looking to see if there was any traffic overtaking them, whose fault is that?
Quite. Also the cyclist has endangered the vehicles on the road.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
I think there’s two problems with it:
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
I've almost been taken out by idiot cyclists hurtling along the pavement on a number of occasions. With the last occasion (this was last year) I'm not convinced I'd be posting here now if I'd been one second earlier.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
Bercause she was a Civil Servant. Senior one. Politics is switched off. Once you resign, you are free.
Do you seriously believe that? It would be incredibly hard to be impartial if you had serious political leanings, which she must have had then.
Situation reversed. Sitting Labour PM has report written on them by a senior civil servant which was a major contributory factor to them having to resign. Said civil servant 9 months later resigns and becomes chief of staff to the Tory Leader. Labour would be up in arms, and rightly so.
How do you know she has 'serious political leanings'? It's a big job, interesting and challenging, no doubt. The holder doesn't have to have political leanings that align closely with the PM's.
What part of her PartyGate report do you think might have been impartial?
A mum has wowed royal fans after transforming her son into Prince Harry for World Book Day. 📚
Three-year-old Ellis Wright is known for his bold personality. Keen to follow her son's wishes, as he didn't want a traditional costume for his first World Book Day at preschool, mum Melissa suggested the Duke of Sussex and author of Spare - and the youngster loved it.
📚 Using children's hair spray and face paint, she transformed Ellis into Prince Harry, complete with ginger hair and a beard, which her son picked as his favourite part of the outfit.
Isn't the whole point to get children interested in books, rather than just dress up?
I think it unlikely that the little lad has had the whole thing read to him as a bed time story, or what he would make of the frostbitten genitalia were he to do so!
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
Bercause she was a Civil Servant. Senior one. Politics is switched off. Once you resign, you are free.
Do you seriously believe that? It would be incredibly hard to be impartial if you had serious political leanings, which she must have had then.
Situation reversed. Sitting Labour PM has report written on them by a senior civil servant which was a major contributory factor to them having to resign. Said civil servant 9 months later resigns and becomes chief of staff to the Tory Leader. Labour would be up in arms, and rightly so.
How do you know she has 'serious political leanings'?
She's taken a job of chief of staff to the Labour party leader!
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
I think there’s two problems with it:
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
The Conservatives have been filling senior civil service posts with, er, 'politically acceptable' people for years now.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I don't see how the cyclist can have been "forced off the pavement" - they could always have stopped. If they went onto the carriageway without looking to see if there was any traffic overtaking them, whose fault is that?
Quite. Also the cyclist has endangered the vehicles on the road.
What a bizarre thing to say. Hard to tell if sarcasm or not.
Newcastle United exposed as liars and should get kicked out of the Premier League
Premier League clubs have reacted with anger to the description in a US court document of the Newcastle chairman, Yasir al-Rumayyan, as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”.
The development has prompted calls from Amnesty for the league to re-examine the assurances given by Newcastle’s owners that the Saudi state would not have control of the club.
The Guardian understands that the clubs dismayed by the situation are in no mood to let the matter lie. The document filed this week has raised fresh questions about the level of separation between the Saudi state and the Public Investment Fund (PIF), whose governor is Rumayyan.
A brief filed in a court case involving the PGA Tour and LIV Golf describes the PIF as “a sovereign instrumentality of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia” and Rumayyan as “a sitting minister of the Saudi government”.
Twist. Or original fudge both parties (money in suitcase FA shook hands over the top of) shouldn’t have got away with now falling apart?
Might not hurt Newcastle, that’s been signed off so much FA face hurt in row back, but could hurt Manchester United more as their similar fudge has yet to be signed off so no face to lose by merely stamping a document “rejected”.
Still all ifs and buts though.
People don't take money in suitcases anymore. Except His Majesty of course.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I don't see how the cyclist can have been "forced off the pavement" - they could always have stopped. If they went onto the carriageway without looking to see if there was any traffic overtaking them, whose fault is that?
Quite. Also the cyclist has endangered the vehicles on the road.
I'm not sure a cyclist can endanger a driver.
I think this a weird case, and much of it must rest on her attitude after the collision (going shopping etc). Callous disregard.
A mum has wowed royal fans after transforming her son into Prince Harry for World Book Day. 📚
Three-year-old Ellis Wright is known for his bold personality. Keen to follow her son's wishes, as he didn't want a traditional costume for his first World Book Day at preschool, mum Melissa suggested the Duke of Sussex and author of Spare - and the youngster loved it.
📚 Using children's hair spray and face paint, she transformed Ellis into Prince Harry, complete with ginger hair and a beard, which her son picked as his favourite part of the outfit.
Isn't the whole point to get children interested in books, rather than just dress up?
I think it unlikely that the little lad has had the whole thing read to him as a bed time story, or what he would make of the frostbitten genitalia were he to do so!
Don’t get me started on what passes for a “book day” costume and what it tells you about whether the parents read….
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Wasn't. Video: slim - NB slim - journo and cyclist squewezing past, wheels just on pavement.
Looked like plenty of space to me. It may mystify people but cyclists generally try to avoid hitting pedestrians, if only on self interest grounds. Personally, when cycling, I've never hit a pedestrian except when they've stepped out into the road or cycle lane directly in front of me without looking. Which happens almost every time I get on my bike, and even then I generally manage to avoid them. If it was me I would have been cycling on the road not the pavement, but then I'm not an old lady and the road doesn't look that safe, no cycle lane, fast traffic and the motorists are probably not very friendly. So I'm not surprised she opted for the pavement.
If you think, based on the two videos available, that there was plenty of room, I would strongly advise you not to cycle *anywhere* except on dedicated cycle tracks.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for them to pass each other easily, even with the lamp post, if the pedestrian had moved to the side. She was set on a confrontation because she didn't think the cyclist should have been on the pavement. The cyclist was cycling slowly, at walking pace, and posed no threat to the pedestrian.
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
Two and possibly three of them are a bit tainted by national exceptionalism, so I guess you would have to pick making the streets safe or breaking down barriers to opportunity.
Yep, that's also my top 2. Although I like them all except for the 'highest growth in the G7' bollox.
The fundamental problem I have with them is "who would argue for the opposite"?
Secure the lowest sustained growth in the G7? OK, possibly a few watermelons and Corbynites.
But the others? Build an NHS unfit for the future? Make Britain's streets dangerous? Put up barriers to opportunity? Have Britain without clean energy?
This is true of almost all 'mission' statements in politics. Look at Mao. Would anyone have argued for a Great Leap Backwards? At least none of them are literally nonsensical like Levelling Up.
But - yes - it's about those policies. Voters will study the manifesto and come to a view. This is as it should be.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
I think there’s two problems with it:
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
The Conservatives have been filling senior civil service posts with, er, 'politically acceptable' people for years now.
I agree. Shockingly so. Needs to be reversed the instant Labour gains power.
A mum has wowed royal fans after transforming her son into Prince Harry for World Book Day. 📚
Three-year-old Ellis Wright is known for his bold personality. Keen to follow her son's wishes, as he didn't want a traditional costume for his first World Book Day at preschool, mum Melissa suggested the Duke of Sussex and author of Spare - and the youngster loved it.
📚 Using children's hair spray and face paint, she transformed Ellis into Prince Harry, complete with ginger hair and a beard, which her son picked as his favourite part of the outfit.
Isn't the whole point to get children interested in books, rather than just dress up?
I think it unlikely that the little lad has had the whole thing read to him as a bed time story, or what he would make of the frostbitten genitalia were he to do so!
A couple of years ago, my sister sent her eldest dressed as Mary Poppins. The teacher said "that's not a book". I suggested to my sister that she sends her dressed as Cathy from Wuthering Heights next time.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I don't see how the cyclist can have been "forced off the pavement" - they could always have stopped. If they went onto the carriageway without looking to see if there was any traffic overtaking them, whose fault is that?
Quite. Also the cyclist has endangered the vehicles on the road.
What a bizarre thing to say. Hard to tell if sarcasm or not.
Why? Could easily have been car swerves into lorry in an attempt to avoid cyclist?
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I think it's the modern scourge of an extreme form of utilitarianism which I have mentioned before. If you believe that morality is purely a matter of consequences then bad consequence = someone's at fault = must blame someone. (This was a factor in the pandemic as well - blaming people for passing on a virus which they didn't even know they had FFS.)
Surely morality is about intent not consequences and the poor woman - who may be obnoxious I admit - didn't intend for the cyclist to veer into traffic and die for goodness sake.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
I think there’s two problems with it:
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
1) PartyGate is history now - not relevant to anything about today's politics.
2) Starmer's whole pitch is sensible, not radical. Johnson and Cummings shows what happens when you value radical/challenging/disrupting over competence.
A mum has wowed royal fans after transforming her son into Prince Harry for World Book Day. 📚
Three-year-old Ellis Wright is known for his bold personality. Keen to follow her son's wishes, as he didn't want a traditional costume for his first World Book Day at preschool, mum Melissa suggested the Duke of Sussex and author of Spare - and the youngster loved it.
📚 Using children's hair spray and face paint, she transformed Ellis into Prince Harry, complete with ginger hair and a beard, which her son picked as his favourite part of the outfit.
Call social services.
It's a fun costume, no question. But anything a three year old does like that is obviously the parental call, not down to their bold personality, why pretend?
Sue Gray has been appointed SKS's chief of staff..
Rubbish appointment.
She obviously fancies the Cab Sec role next year.
Starmer is preparing for Government.
But not in an overconfident and hubristic way. It's just that things are looking awwwright.
He'd better get some talking done, seriously.
Secure the highest sustained growth in the G7 Build an NHS fit for the future Make Britain’s streets safe Breakdown the barriers to opportunity at every stage Make Britain a clean energy superpower
Which is your favourite? See if it's the same as mine.
Two and possibly three of them are a bit tainted by national exceptionalism, so I guess you would have to pick making the streets safe or breaking down barriers to opportunity.
Yep, that's also my top 2. Although I like them all except for the 'highest growth in the G7' bollox.
The fundamental problem I have with them is "who would argue for the opposite"?
Secure the lowest sustained growth in the G7? OK, possibly a few watermelons and Corbynites.
But the others? Build an NHS unfit for the future? Make Britain's streets dangerous? Put up barriers to opportunity? Have Britain without clean energy?
This is true of almost all 'mission' statements in politics. Look at Mao. Would anyone have argued for a Great Leap Backwards? At least none of them are literally nonsensical like Levelling Up.
But - yes - it's about those policies. Voters will study the manifesto and come to a view. This is as it should be.
The alternative to levelling up - carrying on focusing on the prosperous big cities - is certainly something that some people believe in.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Wasn't. Video: slim - NB slim - journo and cyclist squewezing past, wheels just on pavement.
Looked like plenty of space to me. It may mystify people but cyclists generally try to avoid hitting pedestrians, if only on self interest grounds. Personally, when cycling, I've never hit a pedestrian except when they've stepped out into the road or cycle lane directly in front of me without looking. Which happens almost every time I get on my bike, and even then I generally manage to avoid them. If it was me I would have been cycling on the road not the pavement, but then I'm not an old lady and the road doesn't look that safe, no cycle lane, fast traffic and the motorists are probably not very friendly. So I'm not surprised she opted for the pavement.
If you think, based on the two videos available, that there was plenty of room, I would strongly advise you not to cycle *anywhere* except on dedicated cycle tracks.
And I am being entirely serious.
I think OLB may have paid his £5 for an argument this afternoon, but has been reduced to mere contradiction.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I think it's the modern scourge of an extreme form of utilitarianism which I have mentioned before. If you believe that morality is purely a matter of consequences then bad consequence = someone's at fault = must blame someone. (This was a factor in the pandemic as well - blaming people for passing on a virus which they didn't even know they had FFS.)
Surely morality is about intent not consequences and the poor woman - who may be obnoxious I admit - didn't intend for the cyclist to veer into traffic and die for goodness sake.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Wasn't. Video: slim - NB slim - journo and cyclist squewezing past, wheels just on pavement.
Looked like plenty of space to me. It may mystify people but cyclists generally try to avoid hitting pedestrians, if only on self interest grounds. Personally, when cycling, I've never hit a pedestrian except when they've stepped out into the road or cycle lane directly in front of me without looking. Which happens almost every time I get on my bike, and even then I generally manage to avoid them. If it was me I would have been cycling on the road not the pavement, but then I'm not an old lady and the road doesn't look that safe, no cycle lane, fast traffic and the motorists are probably not very friendly. So I'm not surprised she opted for the pavement.
The antipathy that some people have towards anyone on a bicycle - even 77 year old ladies - is extraordinary. This poor woman basically fell into the road while trying to avoid an accident and was hit and killed by a car, and there are people here blaming her for endangering vehicles!
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for them to pass each other easily, even with the lamp post, if the pedestrian had moved to the side. She was set on a confrontation because she didn't think the cyclist should have been on the pavement. The cyclist was cycling slowly, at walking pace, and posed no threat to the pedestrian.
Just to reiterate, as you seem to have forgotten (and as the judge allegedly also did not realise) the cyclist should not have been on the pavement. If she chooses to cycle on the pavement then the pedestrian has absolute right of way. There is no question of being 'set on a confrontation.' She did not move out of the way and she did not need to. I also don't think you can make a judgement on the speed of the cyclist from that clip although I agree she doesn't appear to be going too fast.
Cyclists may choose to cycle on pavements for good reasons, but they are there on sufferance. In this case, a series of things went wrong with tragic results but if there is not a great deal more that is not being reported the charge shouldn't have been anything more than a breach of the peace.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
I think there’s two problems with it:
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
1) PartyGate is history now - not relevant to anything about today's politics.
2) Starmer's whole pitch is sensible, not radical. Johnson and Cummings shows what happens when you value radical/challenging/disrupting over competence.
1) It’s relevant if this helps tip the balance of the committee and keeps Boris in Parliament.
2) See above. Take this road to its conclusion and I think Starmer, if he wins, gets murdered by Boris or a Boris clone next time. Which is bad, because it’s definitely Labour’s turn.
Before this turns into a big fight: we are seeing a huge increase in cycling across the country. This is a very good thing.
It's often very scary cycling around town. That's why so many cyclists are so aggro - all of us have either been hit or nearly hit by drivers who simply don't care about us. My girlfriend was hit from behind quite recently. Frame crushed, helmet smashed, lots of hugs off me.
So lots of people (especially kids) cycle on the pavements.
Answer is to divert funding from roads to cycling infrastructure. As we've seen from Crossrail, induced demand is real. Congestion will fall, emissions will drop, and people will lead healthier, happier lives.
Before this turns into a big fight: we are seeing a huge increase in cycling across the country. This is a very good thing.
It's often very scary cycling around town. That's why so many cyclists are so aggro - all of us have either been hit or nearly hit by drivers who simply don't care about us. My girlfriend was hit from behind quite recently. Frame crushed, helmet smashed, lots of hugs off me.
So lots of people (especially kids) cycle on the pavements.
Answer is to divert funding from roads to cycling infrastructure. As we've seen from Crossrail, induced demand is real. Congestion will fall, emissions will drop, and people will lead healthier, happier lives.
Nah. Ban cycles. We will have all electric cars soon and we can walk/run for fitness.
Actually, I might have convinced myself to seriously propose that…
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
"The trial was told that police could not "categorically" state whether the pavement was a shared cycleway."
stands out. I'd say that, as is not uncommon in the UK, poor road / cycle path design is the main culprit in this instance.
Personally very confused as to why the pedestrian does not have right of way even if it is shared use. At the point they crossed by the lamppost there is not room for both of them. Why does the cyclist have priority?
The pedestrian was rude, aggressive and apparently unremorseful, but from whats been reported manslaughter feels a very big stretch.
I initially thought it seemed very harsh on the pedestrian, changed my mind a little when it turned out to be apparently shared use, although the lack of clarity on that is unclear - I also didn't know about a pinch point at the scene.
I'm always a bit uneasy about sentencing that is based on outcomes of an action rather than the action. Had there not been a car passing, the sentence, if it even got to court, would have been minor. Likewise, there was a report on the BBC website a few days back about a lad who drove a car into the back of a lorry at high speed, after a police chase, where the lorry was bumped off the road and the car rebounded onto the chasing police car getting a suspended sentence. Luck brought no serious injuries in that case, but that looks to me to be the bigger crime.
ETA: Don't think the video was there when I first saw, or I missed it. Ridiculous shared space - an accident waiting to happen.
There must be something missing.
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
I suspect the decision rests on the idea of forcing the cyclist off the pavement - i.e. that the woman intentionally blocked the path and effectively forced the cyclist into the traffic, even without intent to cause serious harm. I can't make that call from the video provided, but quite possible there was more info or footage for the judge.
I might be in a good position to comment on this, as I think I know exactly where that is, and I have walked, run and cycled past there (many times for the former, several times for running and cycling).
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
Note that a little further on, there is a pole supporting a traffic sign, a pole supporting a traffic light, and a box on the footpath. As well as a pedestrian crossing.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
Bercause she was a Civil Servant. Senior one. Politics is switched off. Once you resign, you are free.
Do you seriously believe that? It would be incredibly hard to be impartial if you had serious political leanings, which she must have had then.
Situation reversed. Sitting Labour PM has report written on them by a senior civil servant which was a major contributory factor to them having to resign. Said civil servant 9 months later resigns and becomes chief of staff to the Tory Leader. Labour would be up in arms, and rightly so.
How do you know she has 'serious political leanings'?
She's taken a job of chief of staff to the Labour party leader!
Might just enjoy working with PMs of any flavour.....some sort of political masochism.
Despite genuinely being impressed by Starmer more recently, I am a bit perplexed by his Sue Gray move.
I'm not a fan of Boris but this just stinks to high heaven. How can someone clearly close enough in sympathies to the Labour party to join them now as the Leader's Chief of Staff have possibly written a completely impartial report into a Conservative PM less than a year ago?
I think there’s two problems with it:
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
1. Yep - this will infuriate Tories who want Johnson to make a comeback. I am struggling to see the downside for Labour, though. 2. If you want to be radical and quickly, you need to know how government works so you can get things done.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Which PBer was it who used to entertain us with tales of the fat men on fixies?
A local cycling club where I live - all the gear and no idea. Also no training. Not actually fixies, probably.
The kind of people who spend 5 figures on a bike but can't get up a 5% gradient.
EDIT: behaviour much as described above. The bit that gets to me, is that they do this, when about 30 minutes away at slow, easy cycling pace, you have Richmond Park, with long smooth roads which have been set up specifically for people to really go for it on their bikes.
Fixies are quite hard to ride starting out (declaring an interest, I have one), so v much not one for the ATGNI crowd. Single speed with freewheel, maybe - but tbh fixies (and fixie lookalikes) stopped being fashionable about a decade ago. I ride one for the same reason my grandad did - good for fitness, low maintenance and fun.
Before this turns into a big fight: we are seeing a huge increase in cycling across the country. This is a very good thing.
It's often very scary cycling around town. That's why so many cyclists are so aggro - all of us have either been hit or nearly hit by drivers who simply don't care about us. My girlfriend was hit from behind quite recently. Frame crushed, helmet smashed, lots of hugs off me.
So lots of people (especially kids) cycle on the pavements.
Answer is to divert funding from roads to cycling infrastructure. As we've seen from Crossrail, induced demand is real. Congestion will fall, emissions will drop, and people will lead healthier, happier lives.
Marvellous. Pedestrians such as me get the risk instead for the next wheneveritisty years.
If it's not safe on the roads - then cyclists should bloody stop cycling rather than threaten others instead.
Pro-Boris Tories criticising the appt play into Labour’s hands as it gives Starmer’s team an excuse to talk about all the sleaze allegations the govt has been plagued by… & there have been many
Your occasional reminder that Sue Gray only did the Partygate inquiry because Simon Case had to pull out because he'd been accused of having one of the bloody parties in his office.
She was appointed to the probe by - that's right folks - Boris Johnson.
The again, we have the clowns who think that any attempt to at stopping ebikes doing 30mph on pedestrian pathways on the Thames embankments is "blocking the future".
Apparently, doing 5mph like the other cyclists - because of the large number of people walking, children etc - is "too restricting"
If you have a vehicle with power and you want to ride at that speed there are some other "pathways" you can use. London is full of them.
I go for
- Geo locking - Spot checks. If you have a e-whatever with geolocking disabled, straight to the crusher.
Interesting points.
1 - If it does 30mph, it's a moped not an ebike (which top out assistance at 14.5mph), so is subject to all moped regulation. Speaking as a resident of Chiswick for 4 years, yes, confiscate and crush in those circs.
2 - Would you go for geo-locking and crushing to control pavement parking? It's an interesting idea, and pavement parking is a far greater disruption than anything any e-bike or moped does.
I bet you are a devotee of Jeremy Vine's twitter feed too and that Cycling Mikey clown.
I think Vine does a job of keeping some things in the public eye, which need to be there. I agree with him *some* of the time.
I find Mikey more interesting, and he does a decent job of getting dangerous drivers (which is his 'Gandalf' wrong-side-of-the-road drivers and all mobile phone using drivers) into continuing education courses, at a time when this country has *zero* routine continuing education for drivers, and an appalling road culture. It is interesting how much support he gets from senior members at places like Pistonheads and Pepipoo.
Far better if we were all updated every 10 years when we replace our photocards, but for now ROSPA, the IAM, Ashley Neal, Cycling Mikey, lots of dash cammers, and various bits and pieces are all we have.
I walk, run, cycle and drive. I have seen bad pedestrians, runners, cyclists and drivers. I have been a bad pedestrian, runner, cyclist and pedestrian at times. It's called being human, and making mistakes. Part of the battle for improvement is acknowledging that.
I have seen some *terrible* cyclists; including some speed demons whilst on a run last Sunday. Six or seven lycra-clad pepperamis were coming towards me three abreast along a single track road, and instead of going into single or double file, they just ploughed on towards me at speed, forcing me onto the verge,
Wankers.
I'd love it if Vine gave examples where *he'd* got things wrong. Perhaps he does, but they never appear in my feed. But from what I see, he comes across as a little bit of a Peter Perfect.
Apologies if its been done already but what are pb cyclists thoughts on todays manslaughter conviction and 3 year jail term for the pedestrian ruled to have caused a cyclists death?
Seems reasonable. There was plenty of space for the cyclist to pass safely, what was her problem? The cyclist was an old lady, not some lycra clad MAMIL bearing down at 20mph. This mad woman forced her into the road, causing her death, and didn't even hang around for the emergency services to arrive. I'm sure she didn't mean to kill her, but that's why it's manslaughter not murder.
Why does the cyclist have right of way?
There was space for both of them, why was the pedestrian taking up the whole pavement?
Wasn't. Video: slim - NB slim - journo and cyclist squewezing past, wheels just on pavement.
Looked like plenty of space to me. It may mystify people but cyclists generally try to avoid hitting pedestrians, if only on self interest grounds. Personally, when cycling, I've never hit a pedestrian except when they've stepped out into the road or cycle lane directly in front of me without looking. Which happens almost every time I get on my bike, and even then I generally manage to avoid them. If it was me I would have been cycling on the road not the pavement, but then I'm not an old lady and the road doesn't look that safe, no cycle lane, fast traffic and the motorists are probably not very friendly. So I'm not surprised she opted for the pavement.
The antipathy that some people have towards anyone on a bicycle - even 77 year old ladies - is extraordinary. This poor woman basically fell into the road while trying to avoid an accident and was hit and killed by a car, and there are people here blaming her for endangering vehicles!
Anti-cyclist derangement is real, widespread and utterly bizarre.
Comments
The Tories were doing worse than being a "handful" of points behind Labour in summer 2022 but they were probably doing no worse than you'd expect for a government in mid-term.
That's not the case since Boris was removed from office when the Tories went over the edge of the cliff after the Liz and Kwasi debacle.
Rish has improved the Con position slightly but not by enough to prevent Labour forming the next government even accounting for swingback in the next year or so....
Shouting at someone is not an action that might reasonably thought to carry a risk that they would die.
Is it?
Explains his finances.
You are probably an excellent cyclist. But many cyclists are not. And even you would probably admit to having made mistakes whilst out on your bike?
Considering Boris is actually right about that, how did we get here? Because Con MPs thought they had a get out of jail card in the insanely popular Dishy Rishi, brainwashed themselves into believing they would get a bounce back to perhaps a majority defending support under Rishi Sunak, so once foiled by their own membership it wasn’t too long before Con MPs got what they wanted. They bet the next election on this hunch.
The truth here, those who hate Johnson, his bluster, boosterism, bullshit, really hate him, as far as the hate scale on offer will allow. Classic marmite because it’s also true, if Boris became leader now they would go into the next election with more voters than with Rishi.
What evidence proves me right? Here are snips of what Mike Smithson posted last week to prove it. Under Boris the Tories 38% in the Red Wall (Labour heartland) seats they won for the first time time last time, Only 7 behind Labour Mid Term, EVEN after Sue Gray, and AFTER fines, and around time he is ousted. And in contrast how the Sunak bounce never happened.
Why and how does this work psychologically and psephologically? Different types of politician and personality. Boris, populist similar to Trump, playing on how much better it used to be so let’s rebuild better, makes voters look forward and forget about austerity, forget 13 wasted year of income erosion becuase they are given hope of better times - whilst Rishi just resonates everything that reminds voters the Tories have been in 13 years and under him just more of the same. Sunak’s slicker Technocrat platform and style is just so similar to everything voters remember and hate about these years of Tory governments, delivering income erosion and ongoing austerity.
Note: you don't need to hit a cyclist to kill them. I was crossing the tram tracks on Princes Street but, because a coach was an inch behind me, I got all flustered. Nearly came off under the pressure and would have gone straight under him given the lack of time to react.
I missed it watching the video on the page, with the reporter but 30 seconds in you actually see a cyclist squeezing past the reporter (quite quickly). He is a few inches from the kerb, and they did not cross right by the lamppost. I can see why that might not work with a 77 year old cyclist and a pedestrian with cerebral palsy and partial vision.
Its a tragic accident where both sides could have been safer and more considerate, but not manslaughter imo.
https://twitter.com/AlanMyles8/status/1629990008064036865?t=NodezHRK1xv2Q40NgbdAUg&s=19
(For those unfamiliar with the story: Trump got angry with being called "short-fingered", not being called a"vulgarian". https://www.politico.com/blogs/2016-gop-primary-live-updates-and-results/2016/03/donald-trump-short-fingered-vulgarian-220359
Naturally, most American cartoonists draw Trump with tiny hands.)
There's no way I'd cycle on the pavement there in normal circumstances. She was cycling with the traffic direction, and it's not the widest path.
I don't think the woman's attitude helped, but no-one wanted this to happen. It was an accident, and I cannot see the cyclist as not having contributed to the sad incident. Unless there's something we haven't seen, it seems a ludicrous decision to jail her.
The kind of people who spend 5 figures on a bike but can't get up a 5% gradient.
EDIT: behaviour much as described above. The bit that gets to me, is that they do this, when about 30 minutes away at slow, easy cycling pace, you have Richmond Park, with long smooth roads which have been set up specifically for people to really go for it on their bikes.
Nearly got wiped out by a driver from behind as a result.
I don't think it's intended to be trolling of Boris or the Tories, though it may have that side effect.
Is leaving the scene of an accident a crime? - if so then maybe there is a case to answer there but even then there was the car driver present and possibly other witnesses.
I use shared pathways a fair bit. In fact I walk my dogs on one regularly. Most cyclists are sensible and reasonable and accept the obligation on them to give way to slower and generally more vulnerable users. Some though...well, you can join the dots.
There is a lot missing in this report. Bit Daily Heil.
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/mar/02/pedestrian-jailed-manslaughter-cyclist-fall-car-huntingdon
Secure the lowest sustained growth in the G7? OK, possibly a few watermelons and Corbynites.
But the others? Build an NHS unfit for the future? Make Britain's streets dangerous? Put up barriers to opportunity? Have Britain without clean energy?
I'm sure I originally recall that these scooters were allowed on the pavements but it turns out that they must ride on the road. Understandably, hardly anyone wears helmets (would largely defeat the object of the scheme).
So should these scooters be on the pavement or the road? What about if there is a cycle lane?
https://news.oxfordshire.gov.uk/new-escooter-launch/
For comparison look at 30 seconds in on the bbc report, where a cyclist goes past the reporter.
Yes, sure, the pedestrian could have stopped and moved aside, but they had right of way as I understood it. The cyclist could also have stopped, and had the duty to do so.
There are a few daft shared pavements on my cycle commute. Not as bad as those, but I ignore them and stick to the road as I think I cycle too fast to belong on a shared narrow pavement with pedestrians. If I did take them, I'd go much slower and be prepared to stop.
Situation reversed. Sitting Labour PM has report written on them by a senior civil servant which was a major contributory factor to them having to resign. Said civil servant 9 months later resigns and becomes chief of staff to the Tory Leader. Labour would be up in arms, and rightly so.
1) Political comms. Exactly your point. “We can now ignore her report, she’s just a Labourite”. “Look at Labour now - it’s the establishment. They got us to where we are today - don’t you want to do things differently”?
2) Political substance. If you want radical, don’t hire an ex Permanent Secretary. Blair might have brought in Powell, but he also had Campbell and Mandelson. Too many civil servants (and Starmer was one too) and you risk being ultra cautious and doing nothing in power.
What part of her PartyGate report do you think might have been impartial?
I think it unlikely that the little lad has had the whole thing read to him as a bed time story, or what he would make of the frostbitten genitalia were he to do so!
I think this a weird case, and much of it must rest on her attitude after the collision (going shopping etc). Callous disregard.
And I am being entirely serious.
But - yes - it's about those policies. Voters will study the manifesto and come to a view. This is as it should be.
Surely morality is about intent not consequences and the poor woman - who may be obnoxious I admit - didn't intend for the cyclist to veer into traffic and die for goodness sake.
2) Starmer's whole pitch is sensible, not radical. Johnson and Cummings shows what happens when you value radical/challenging/disrupting over competence.
I hope he does read it now though.
I don't believe it correct, but neither is it homophones.
Biggest council tax increase for Wales confirmed for Conwy county
https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/conwy-approves-biggest-council-tax-26373400#ICID=Android_DailyPostNewsApp_AppShare
Cyclists may choose to cycle on pavements for good reasons, but they are there on sufferance. In this case, a series of things went wrong with tragic results but if there is not a great deal more that is not being reported the charge shouldn't have been anything more than a breach of the peace.
2) See above. Take this road to its conclusion and I think Starmer, if he wins, gets murdered by Boris or a Boris clone next time. Which is bad, because it’s definitely Labour’s turn.
It's often very scary cycling around town. That's why so many cyclists are so aggro - all of us have either been hit or nearly hit by drivers who simply don't care about us. My girlfriend was hit from behind quite recently. Frame crushed, helmet smashed, lots of hugs off me.
So lots of people (especially kids) cycle on the pavements.
Answer is to divert funding from roads to cycling infrastructure. As we've seen from Crossrail, induced demand is real. Congestion will fall, emissions will drop, and people will lead healthier, happier lives.
Actually, I might have convinced myself to seriously propose that…
https://goo.gl/maps/zs2tnpFF9MX3Nz1UA
Note that a little further on, there is a pole supporting a traffic sign, a pole supporting a traffic light, and a box on the footpath. As well as a pedestrian crossing.
That is *not* a cycle path.
2. If you want to be radical and quickly, you need to know how government works so you can get things done.
If it's not safe on the roads - then cyclists should bloody stop cycling rather than threaten others instead.
Pro-Boris Tories criticising the appt play into Labour’s hands as it gives Starmer’s team an excuse to talk about all the sleaze allegations the govt has been plagued by… & there have been many
@mikeysmith
Your occasional reminder that Sue Gray only did the Partygate inquiry because Simon Case had to pull out because he'd been accused of having one of the bloody parties in his office.
She was appointed to the probe by - that's right folks - Boris Johnson.